Windows still doesn't come with a decent word processor or photo editor? And it takes 11 GB? All the other consumer-level operating systems have much more software, and take up much less space. I know there's been a lot of hype around Windows 7, but I just don't see why when I look at what we already have. Compared to Vista, maybe Windows 7 is an improvement. But compared to OS X or Ubuntu or Debian?
But there are only two other consumer level OS's. Linux and OS X.
On Linux, all the software is free (unless you have very special needs) and distributable. And Linux doesn't distribute anything which isn't freely distributable (in general).
OS X doesn't come with a word processor or a photo app. Macs do. Which is different. Apple doesn't sell operating systems. They sell systems in general.
Furthermore, some linux distros only come with a word processor because you can run apt-get install openoffice, which you can do under Windows just fine (well, go to the web and download the exe, or install something like apt under SUA).
Paint I'd partly agree with, but regarding Wordpad I guess that really depends on your interpretation.
Wordpad and the Word Processor component of Google Docs are comparable in features and lots of people laud Google's offering as good enough, so where's the difference?
Microsoft already has it ingrained in people to pay for their Office product, even though they give away a good enough offering (in comparison to Google's Docs). Why should they give away Word?
He suggested that MS would cop flak from the EU if they included those products in their OS, which they already do.
Just because they're not as good as other offerings on the market is irrelevant. The fact is they're there, and MS doesn't cop flak over it - which is partly why I think the EU decisions up to date have been pretty pathetic.
Disclaimer: I don't work for Microsoft, nor do I currently use their products (Linux user).
